In Celebration of Liberty

In Celebration of Liberty

The Key to Politics and Spirituality

James Wasserman

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.” — George Orwell 1984

“At the very moment when American citizens have been publicly targeted for death by foreign and domestic enemies with a track record of successful attacks, “our” government responds by attempting to further inhibit our capacity to defend ourselves. Who are these people? Why do we continue to pay their salaries?” — James Wasserman The Slaves Shall Serve

Some Personal History

About 25 years ago, two explosive news events were to have an enormous psychological impact and profoundly color my world view.

In August of 1992, I became ill and ran a high fever. A friend was getting married; I had to miss the wedding, confined to bed and generally miserable. I saw a small article in that sacred scroll of “All the News Fit to Print” better known as The New York Times. It concerned a “standoff” at Ruby Ridge, Idaho between approximately 300 government agents, armed with every weapon Uncle Sam could muster short of nuclear missiles, and a “kook” named Randy Weaver. Weaver’s 14-year-old son had been shot in the back by the Feds, and his wife was killed by an FBI sniper while she was holding her baby. Randy himself was wounded and holed up in his mountain cabin with another wounded friend, his two older daughters, and the baby. The Times printed a photo of some agents with the letters ATF prominently displayed on one man’s back. I at once realized such large letters were designed to lessen the chances of killing one of their own when shooting their fellow citizens in the back. I searched the few paragraphs of the article over and over for a clue to Randy Weaver’s crime, and could only find vague suggestions of “weapons violations.” Weaver was described as a neo-Nazi racist and that was basically that.

As a Jew, with one child of mixed race, neo-Nazi racists are not exactly my cup of tea, nor do I suspect I’m theirs. But there I was with this unusually high fever. And I lay my head down and closed my eyes — and my soul literally entered Randy Weaver’s cabin, and my psyche became conjoined with his for a time. And I experienced his torment. I felt his grief, his terror, his horror through every fiber of my being. And I came out of it and cried, and told my wife how sad he was; and what a horrible thing it was to have your son and your wife killed; and all those murderers outside your cabin with their guns and the signs on their backs so they won’t hurt each other when they kill your children; and to be painted by the press as some subhuman scum whom it was the government’s duty to eliminate.

The world seemed very different when that fever broke. The country of my birth seemed especially different.

I immersed myself in an attempt to understand what had happened. I had had a fair degree of exposure to political conspiracies during my research into mystical secret societies. Yet I had largely bypassed the sinister forces of Collectivism in favor of the Light Bearers whose wisdom I sought. The experience with Weaver forced me to search the other side. After months of sleepless nights and many thousands of pages of reading, I was on the verge of a nervous breakdown. I knew I had to stop, and finally began to pull myself out of it sometime between mid January and early February of 1993. Guess what happened next? Hello David Koresh and the Janet Reno childcare program.

People are often startled when this studious-looking refugee from the 60’s espouses a political philosophy that seems more akin to Attila the Hun than either Barack Obama or Pocahontas Warren. Like how could someone who has taken so much LSD not cheerfully support the one-world, internationalist, corporate-socialist, U.N. directed global village?

Here is the reason. Liberty has been the entire basis of my life quest. I have used every technique I could find to maximize my Liberty — meditation, ritual magick, sex, drugs, sobriety, philosophy, personal economics, career orientation. I have come to believe that political liberty is an essential component of spiritual liberty.

I too embraced socialism as a youth. My heart was torn by injustice. Racism, poverty, hunger, war, pestilence — all seemed curable if only we could muster the will to unite to stop them. How else could this be accomplished other than through the concerted efforts of a centrally planned system whose over-reaching power could proceed unobstructed to these lofty goals? A letter to my parents in the summer of 1966 confirms that I was aware this would involve compulsion. However, at age eighteen, I believed the greater good outweighed the rights of the individual — a belief I no longer hold.

A series of warnings about socialism came soon after in the fall of 1966, when I served as a volunteer political activist in Washington D.C. through the work/study program at my college. I was a research assistant to the last white lawyer for the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). Black Power had just been declared that spring. I met a lot of the big names in the civil rights and anti-war movement. I noticed that many of them seemed either mean-spirited or unhappy with their lives. I detected their cravings for power. I realized my political work would merely help substitute one group of power-mad sociopaths for another — and accomplish nothing. The end for me came when I had a rare, relaxed, private conversation with my boss. I asked him if he thought our work might actually be helping the communists, as many people then claimed. He told me he frankly didn’t care, that he did not reject communism outright. I did, and left soon thereafter. Only later did I understand that socialism is step one on the road to communism.

I became aware of the spirit, and turned inward. In a “position statement” to myself written at the end of 1966, I defined meditation and the spiritual life as the sole means of achieving the humanitarian goals I sought. I believed then, and still do, that the salvation of humanity needs to be achieved one person, one mind, one soul at a time. That only by rooting out the evil and ignorance within oneself is it truly possible to root out evil and ignorance in the world. I sought, and continue to seek, spiritual enlightenment.

In mid-1967, I met a new college roommate who became a close friend. A member of the cutting-edge, communist Progressive Labor Party, he once explained that, despite our friendship, when the revolution came, I would be one of those rounded up and executed. My bourgeois beliefs in the sanctity of the individual were counter-productive to the “will of the people.” I now truly understood what I was up against.

A decade later, I had begun to work as a freelance book designer. A client asked me to give her my price for doing a project. But she warned me that a non-profit, government-funded book production studio was also quoting on the job. I mentioned this to my mentor in dismay, and he laughed. He suggested I ask my client how she would like the Post Office to produce her book! When I think of the socialist goal of a world bureaucracy run by “experts” and civil servants, I ask myself: How would I like the Post Office to run the world?

I also reject the collectivist police state because of my family background. I will never abandon the childhood pride inspired by my father’s tale of his father’s arrival in America, among the early twentieth century wave of legal immigrants. My grandfather was a 16-year-old peasant boy during the Cossack pogroms conducted against the Jews by the Russian government. A drunken soldier locked him and a group of villagers in a barn and began to set fire to it. My grandfather shoved a pitchfork through the barn door and killed the soldier, saving many lives. Needless to say, he was forced to flee. Perhaps this bit of family history, combined with my knowledge of the murder of many relatives on my mother’s side by the Nazi government of Germany, leaves me with a tendency to be less than trustful of government in general.

The Doctrine of Freedom

I embrace the teachings of Aleister Crowley and The Book of the Law. A logical corollary of this is that I believe in Divine Inspiration. I also believe that The Book of the Law was neither the first nor the last time divine inspiration penetrated human consciousness. I believe the American Constitution and its Bill of Rights to be a divinely inspired model of the type of society later articulated by Crowley in Liber Oz (a short tract published in 1941 that expressed the political philosophy of The Book of the Law in words of one syllable). What makes the ideas of both Liber Oz and the Bill of Rights so radical is their guarantee of nearly unlimited personal liberty and individual rights. If these two documents are examples of secret societies engineering social change, Brethren, let us pray![1]

Implicit in seeking to maximize individual liberty is a recognition of the divinity inherent within each human being. Quoting The Book of the Law, “Every man and every woman is a star” and “. . . thou hast no right but to do thy will.” These statements posit both a will to do, and an attainable celestial nature at the root of the self. The reigning political goal of a society built on these principles must be the encouragement of maximum individual liberty for the most unfettered growth of the inner potential.

I watch with sorrow as American society continues to embrace the socialist doctrine, like so many sheep willingly herding themselves into the pen to be shorn. Did “Bernie” Sanders really get so many votes? I am reminded of Crowley’s remarks about religion. If the reader will simply substitute “the State” for “God” in the following extract, I think the point will have been made.

“The type of tailless simian who finds himself a mere forked radish in a universe of giants clamouring for hors d’oeuvres must take refuge from Reality in Freudian phantasies of `God’ [the State]. He winces at the touch of Truth; and shivers at his nakedness in Nature. He therefore invents a cult of fear and shame, and makes it presumption and blasphemy to possess courage and self-respect.” [2]

Respect for human nature is an absolute prerequisite for a vision of human freedom. The American Bill of Rights represents the first time in history that individual sovereignty was regarded as primary, and government sovereignty as secondary. The Declaration of Independence spells out America’s founders’ understanding of the origin of our rights in no uncertain terms, “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are . . . endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights . . .”

The inviolate supremacy of the unalienable rights acknowledged in the Bill of Rights is protected, in our system, from the State. The “human rights” acknowledged by the UN and other World Government models are conditional upon the will of the State. They are contingent rights, more accurately privileges, given or dispensed by the State. One cannot over-emphasize the importance of the difference between these two points of view. Quite simply, it is the difference between freedom and tyranny.

What Is Government?

Reduced to its most basic essence, the nature of government is force. From the ability to enforce compliance with traffic lights and speed limits, to the ability to collect taxes, to the ability to wage war with vast armies and terrible weapons, government is force. By its very definition therefore, government is a potential threat to those who fall within its sphere of influence. America’s founders recognized this simple truism and sought to protect themselves and their progeny by severely limiting government.

The U.S. Constitution purposely set up an inefficient government—in Jefferson’s words, “shackled by the chains of the Constitution.” The system of checks and balances was designed to create a continual state of tension in which the power drives of one branch of government would be offset by those of another. The legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the federal government compete among themselves. The popular House of Representatives is pitted against the patrician Senate. The national government is ideally contending with a group of tenacious state governments. Local and county governments contend with each other. All governmental power groups are balanced against the most important group of all, a free and self-determined citizenry by whose will and consent these various government units are formed and empowered. And the people themselves are checked against their predictable excesses by a written code of law, the Constitution. The founders were well aware of the dangers of democracy — whose anti-symbol is the lynch mob, the apotheosis of unrestrained majority rule. America is designed to be a Republic, not a democracy.[3]

Proponents of the “Global Village” model of cradle-to-grave- security and obedience appear far less concerned with the dangers of abuse of power by the State. They would receive little comfort from the statistics presented by Professor R. J. Rummel. In all international and civil wars of the twentieth century from 1900–1987, Rummel estimates that a minimum of 38,500,000 soldiers and civilians died. In the same period, he estimates that a minimum of 170,000,000 people were starved, gassed and otherwise slaughtered by their governments during times of peace. In other words, in the first eighty-seven years of the twentieth century, a person was four times more likely to have been murdered by his government during peacetime, than killed by his country’s enemies during war.[4]

Building the Nanny State

No one today is either unaware of, or unconcerned about, the critical issues facing our modern world. Indeed, the complexity of the conditions encountered by 21st century humanity might be viewed as an invigorating challenge by a strong-minded, optimistic, and creative people. Instead, a depressed and impotent spirit pervades much of the West. Widespread cynicism has been erected upon the collapse of morality and a plunging birth rate. We have abandoned our vision of the sovereignty and competence of the individual, as well as the acceptance of a transcendent reality against which our decisions are to be weighed.

The leaders of the Collectivist movement are people in government, finance, education, and the media who feel they are better qualified to run our lives than we are. A particularly telling example of this observation is a statement by Saint Hillary Clinton (“she who wuz robbed!”) to Illinois Congressman (later convicted child-molester) Dennis Hastert. During a June 1993 meeting on the first open attempt to take over America’s healthcare system, Mrs. Clinton expressed her rejection of medical savings accounts in these words:

“We can’t do that. The first reason is with the medical savings account, people have to act on their own and make their own decisions about health care. And they have to make sure that they get the inoculations and the preventative care that they need, and we just think that people will skip too much because in a medical savings account if you don’t spend it, you get to keep it. . . . We just think people will be too focused on saving money and they won’t get the care for their children and themselves that they need. We think the government, by saying ‘you have to make this schedule. You have to have your kids in for inoculations here, you have to do a prescreening here, you have to do this’ — the government will make better decisions than the people will make, and people will be healthier because of it. . . . We can’t trust the American people to make those type of choices. [T]he second reason is, with a medical savings account, savings are [like] an IRA. . . We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.”[5]

We are sacrificing our liberty to these busybodies because they seem to value it more than we do. Sooner than you think, they will demand we make them responsible for licensing us to produce our children. Later they will insist on determining those children’s schooling, profession, and place of residence (all in the name of efficiency, ecology, crime-prevention, human rights, etc., ad nauseam).

The Age of the Expert

Those who embrace the collectivist ideal have rejected a basic philosophical assumption about humanity that underlies all dreams of Freedom. That is that within our species is a potential for harmonious development when each does the bidding of his true nature to the fullest. No less an authority than Carroll Quigley, author of Tragedy and Hope, has declared this a “superstition,” an example of nineteenth century romanticism. Quigley well describes certain key aspects of what might be called the vision of an inherently successful humanity.

“[L]iberalism was based on an almost universally accepted nineteenth-century superstition known as the “community of interests.” This strange, and unexamined, belief held that there really existed, in the long run, a community of interests between the members of a society. . . a possible social pattern in which each member of society would be secure, free, and prosperous, and that this pattern could be achieved by a process of adjustment so that each person could fall into that place in the pattern to which his innate abilities entitled him. This implied two corollaries which the nineteenth century was prepared to accept: (1) that human abilities are innate and can only be distorted or suppressed by social discipline and (2) that each individual is the best judge of his own self-interest. All these together form the doctrine of the “community of interests,” a doctrine which maintained that if each individual does what seems best for himself, the result, in the long run, will be best for society as a whole.” [6] [emphasis mine]

Lest that cause us moderns any anxiety, some 800 pages later, Quigley makes clear that this vision has been deemed inoperative. He explains that twentieth century realism finally came to terms with man’s intrinsically flawed nature. Social scientists identified humanity as an inherently unsuccessful species. Quigley advanced us into the Age of the Expert. Social planners are the new deities who will bring order out of the chaos of mankind’s unbridled and destructive passions. They will channel our base natures into constructive byways. Quigley writes,

“[I}t is increasingly clear that, in the twentieth century, the expert will replace the industrial tycoon in control of the economic system even as he will replace the democratic voter in control of the political system. This is because planning will inevitably replace laissez faire in the relationship between the two systems. This planning may not be single or unified, but it will be planning, in which the main framework and operational forces of the system will be established and limited by the experts on the government side; then the experts within the big units on the economic side will do their planning within these established limitations. Hopefully, the elements of choice and freedom may survive for the ordinary individual . . . But, in general, his freedom and choice will be controlled within very narrow alternatives by the fact that he will be numbered from birth and followed, as a number, through his educational training, his required military or other public service, his tax contributions, his health and medical requirements, and his final retirement and death benefits.” [emphasis in original][7]

Political and cultural conspirators are more openly baring their fangs to the media-saturated public than ever before. Their object remains the enslavement of the world’s populations by any means necessary in preparation for a global tyranny that fulfills ambitions dating back at least to ancient Egypt. Everything from science to morality has been weaponized to that end.

Through government control of research money and the monopoly on education, globalists are working toward total control of all natural resources and all human behavior under the banner of Global Warming (aka Climate Change, previously known as The Weather). Their persistence and lack of interest in modifying computer models based on facts is breathtaking—as is their denial of the truth that the most prosperous societies have been the most effective in cleaning up and protecting the environment. (Yes people can learn from and correct our mistakes, especially when we can afford the financial costs associated with reclaiming damaged land/water and preventing future degradation.) Green is the new Red. The eco-fascist propaganda has been largely ignored by many whose common sense tells us that even electric cars need to be charged by burning coal, oil, or atomic energy. We may be better off, for now, using gas-powered cars while continuing to experiment and perfect more efficient and cleaner fuels. However, I tend to believe the real goal is the banning of auto-mobiles (self-transport) altogether. I suggest our socialist masters seek enforced mass transit (except for the important people, of course). Everyone else can then live in centrally-planned “sustainable” communities like cattle in our pens, bicycling or busing to work, without ever experiencing the need or opportunity to be alone.

A far more effective means of building the global tyranny has been found in the programmed destruction of Western civilization through the Third World invasion—most recently resulting from ignoring one’s own self-proclaimed Red Lines drawn against the Syrian genocide. Make or allow a meaningless war; don’t use the military to create and enforce safe zones for displaced people; arrange for them to be moved into countries where they cannot speak the language, cannot earn a living, and whose native lands have no traditions of individuality, self-sufficiency, or the rule of law.

The mechanism of civilization relies on shared cultural values. To quote President Trump:

“We write symphonies. We pursue innovation. We celebrate our ancient heroes, embrace our timeless traditions and customs, and always seek to explore and discover brand-new frontiers. We reward brilliance. We strive for excellence, and cherish inspiring works of art that honor God. We treasure the rule of law and protect the right to free speech and free expression. We empower women as pillars of our society and of our success. We put faith and family, not government and bureaucracy, at the center of our lives. And we debate everything. We challenge everything. We seek to know everything so that we can better know ourselves.”[8]

Merging disparate countries across language barriers through supra-national organizations such as the European Union or the North American Union is certainly an effective means of gradually eroding the sovereignty of the nation state. Yet, it is so much quicker and more effective to create a welfare culture of alienated, non-integrated subgroups at war with each other as we now have in Europe and to a growing extent in America. Then watch the feathers fly as the domestic population builds resentment against rising crime rates and declining wages. (Cheap labor! The opium of the rapacious.) By design, this leads to a spiral of violence and extremist movements (KKK anyone?) allowing the State to step in and bring order out of the chaos it created. Swell. More black clad, armored government ninjas with their (actual) automatic weapons while the rest of us are disarmed for our own protection.

The massive immigration to America (for example) during the early twentieth century saw people coming to our shores who became registered (in other words ”signed the guest book”), submitted to screening for infectious diseases, and had absolutely no social services available beyond public schools—which were all conducted in English. This worked to acculturate new arrivals. My grandparents did not speak English until my mother went to school, learned it, and taught them. They wanted to become “Americans” and did the work necessary to succeed. Read the quote below from Theodore Roosevelt. If you live in France, Germany, Italy, or Australia, please substitute the name of your country for “America.”

“There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all…. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul.” [9]

Personal Responsibility

We who embrace Western values such as education, rational thought, reason, and individual liberty are being challenged by those who confuse parental and government authority. Modern culture has been largely persuaded to be unwilling to face two inevitable facts of life. The first is risk. The second is pain. The psychiatrist replaced the priest, and was himself replaced by the prozac. Avoidance of pain is a natural and necessary survival reaction for a species. However, traditional Western virtues of courage, persistence, and self-reliance have been eroded. The reason is simple. It is easier to control sheep than goats. The method is ingenious. While it has taken a century to effectively organize, it is quite easy to understand. An alliance between government, the media, and the state-mandated, foundation-funded educational system has been indoctrinating the population since the beginning of the twentieth century when the talons of Progressivism began to fasten themselves into the body politic.

At the same time, we must acknowledge that our personal, individual evasion of moral responsibility is the key to the slavery we are substituting daily for the Freedom that is the birthright and responsibility of every citizen. A people gets the government it deserves. We must work with diligence to strengthen ourselves as individuals. The keys are self-discipline and education. An informed electorate can be trusted to choose and guide its politicians. Each of us who escapes the brainwashing is another mind (and vote) free to demand the conservation of Liberty.

While today’s society is vastly different from that of earlier times, two things have not changed. One is human nature. The other is human potential. Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence celebrates human potential. This stands in stark contrast to the pathetic, loser-by-definition, guilt-ridden, hand-wringing, and cringing of the New World Order crowd — sophisticated psychological tactics designed to induce subservience.

I believe each human being has an inborn spiritual destiny which it is our task to learn and fulfill. “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” I believe that many spiritually-minded people have been guilty of burying our heads in the sand — prancing around candlelit rooms, or sitting in meditation, imagining ourselves as conscious beings growing in enlightenment. Please consider that Enlightenment is based on Freedom. Without a determination to extend that freedom to all beings, we become mindless acolytes of the very forces of Darkness against whom we draw our Magic Circles. Meditate on this the next time you watch a news report or engage in social media activities. For thus is the arch-demon described in The Vision and the Voice.

“Choronzon hath no form, because he is the maker of all form; and so rapidly he changeth from one to the other as he may best think fit to seduce those whom he hateth, the servants of the Most High. Thus taketh he the form of a beautiful woman, or of a wise and holy man, or of a serpent that writheth upon the earth ready to sting.” [10]

* * * * * * *

[1] I should make clear that the opinions expressed here are my own. They are not intended to be either an analysis of Crowley’s political thought, nor representative of any policies, doctrines, or beliefs of O.T.O.